Analysis of Safety Benefits for Shielding of Bridge Piers, 2009

The highway system in the State of Iowa includes many grade separation structures constructed to provide maximum safety and mobility to road users on intersecting roadways. However, these structures can present possible safety concerns for traffic passing underneath due to close proximity of piers and abutments. Shielding of these potential hazards has been a design consideration for many years. This study examines historical crash experience in the State of Iowa to address the advisability of shielding bridge piers and abutments as well as other structure support elements considering the offset from the traveled way. A survey of nine Midwestern states showed that six states had bridge pier shielding practices consistent with those in Iowa. Data used for the analyses include crash data (2001 to 2007) from the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT), the Iowa DOT’s Geographic Information Management System (GIMS) structure and roadway data (2006) obtained from the Office of Transportation Data, and shielding and offset data for the bridges of interest. Additionally, original crash reports and the Iowa DOT video log were also utilized as needed. Grade-separated structures over high-speed, multilane divided Interstate and primary highways were selected for analysis, including 566 bridges over roadways with a speed limit of at least 45 mph. Bridges that met the criteria for inclusion in the study were identified for further analysis using crash data. The study also included economic analysis for possible shielding improvement.

Use of LIDAR-based Elevation Data for Highway Drainage Analysis: A Qualitative Assessment, 2003

US Geological Survey (USGS) based elevation data are the most commonly used data source for highway hydraulic analysis; however, due to the vertical accuracy of USGS-based elevation data, USGS data may be too “coarse” to adequately describe surface profiles of watershed areas or drainage patterns. Additionally hydraulic design requires delineation of much smaller drainage areas (watersheds) than other hydrologic applications, such as environmental, ecological, and water resource management. This research study investigated whether higher resolution LIDAR based surface models would provide better delineation of watersheds and drainage patterns as compared to surface models created from standard USGS-based elevation data. Differences in runoff values were the metric used to compare the data sets. The two data sets were compared for a pilot study area along the Iowa 1 corridor between Iowa City and Mount Vernon. Given the limited breadth of the analysis corridor, areas of particular emphasis were the location of drainage area boundaries and flow patterns parallel to and intersecting the road cross section. Traditional highway hydrology does not appear to be significantly impacted, or benefited, by the increased terrain detail that LIDAR provided for the study area. In fact, hydrologic outputs, such as streams and watersheds, may be too sensitive to the increased horizontal resolution and/or errors in the data set. However, a true comparison of LIDAR and USGS-based data sets of equal size and encompassing entire drainage areas could not be performed in this study. Differences may also result in areas with much steeper slopes or significant changes in terrain. LIDAR may provide possibly valuable detail in areas of modified terrain, such as roads. Better representations of channel and terrain detail in the vicinity of the roadway may be useful in modeling problem drainage areas and evaluating structural surety during and after significant storm events. Furthermore, LIDAR may be used to verify the intended/expected drainage patterns at newly constructed highways. LIDAR will likely provide the greatest benefit for highway projects in flood plains and areas with relatively flat terrain where slight changes in terrain may have a significant impact on drainage patterns.

Impact of Left-Turn Phasing on Older and Younger Drivers at High-Speed Signalized Intersections, 2004

Several recent studies have demonstrated differences in safety between different types of left-turn phasing—protected, permitted, and protected/permitted phasing. The issue in question is whether older and younger drivers are more affected by a particular type of left-turn phasing at high-speed signalized intersections and whether they are more likely to contribute to a left-turn related crash under a specific type of left-turn phasing. This study evaluated the impact of different types of left-turn phasing on older and younger drivers at high-speed signalized intersections in Iowa. High-speed signalized intersections were of interest since oncoming speeds and appropriate gaps may be more difficult to judge for older drivers and those with less experience. A total of 101 intersections from various urban locations in Iowa with at least one intersecting roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph or higher were evaluated. Left-turn related crashes from 2001 to 2003 were evaluated. Left-turn crash rate and severity for young drivers (14- to 24-year-old), middle-age drivers (25- to 64-year-old), and older drivers (65 years and older) were calculated. Poisson regression was used to analyze left-turn crash rates by age group and type of phasing. Overall, left-turn crash rates indicated that protected phasing is much safer than protected/permitted and permitted phasing. Protected/permitted phasing had the highest left-turn crash rates overall.